LTS Termination Proof

by T2Cert

Input

Integer Transition System

Proof

1 Invariant Updates

The following invariants are asserted.

0: TRUE
1: TRUE
2: 2 − arg1 ≤ 0
3: TRUE

The invariants are proved as follows.

IMPACT Invariant Proof

2 Switch to Cooperation Termination Proof

We consider the following cutpoint-transitions:
1 4 1: x5 + x5 ≤ 0x5x5 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0
and for every transition t, a duplicate t is considered.

3 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 0, 3 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −11.

3: 0
0: 0
1: 0
2: 0
3: −4
0: −5
1: −6
2: −6
1_var_snapshot: −6
1*: −6
Hints:
5 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
1 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
2 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
0 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
3 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

4 Location Addition

The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.

1* 7 1: x5 + x5 ≤ 0x5x5 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0

5 Location Addition

The following skip-transition is inserted and corresponding redirections w.r.t. the old location are performed.

1 5 1_var_snapshot: x5 + x5 ≤ 0x5x5 ≤ 0arg2P + arg2P ≤ 0arg2Parg2P ≤ 0arg2 + arg2 ≤ 0arg2arg2 ≤ 0arg1P + arg1P ≤ 0arg1Parg1P ≤ 0arg1 + arg1 ≤ 0arg1arg1 ≤ 0

6 SCC Decomposition

We consider subproblems for each of the 1 SCC(s) of the program graph.

6.1 SCC Subproblem 1/1

Here we consider the SCC { 1, 2, 1_var_snapshot, 1* }.

6.1.1 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 1, 2 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by 3.

1: 2 + 4⋅arg1
2: 4⋅arg1
1_var_snapshot: 1 + 4⋅arg1
1*: 3 + 4⋅arg1
Hints:
5 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0] ]
7 lexWeak[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0] ]
1 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
2 lexStrict[ [2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

6.1.2 Transition Removal

We remove transitions 5, 7 using the following ranking functions, which are bounded by −2.

1: −1
2: 0
1_var_snapshot: −2
1*: 0
Hints:
5 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]
7 lexStrict[ [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] , [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ]

6.1.3 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

We consider 1 subproblems corresponding to sets of cut-point transitions as follows.

6.1.3.1 Cut-Point Subproblem 1/1

Here we consider cut-point transition 4.

6.1.3.1.1 Splitting Cut-Point Transitions

There remain no cut-point transition to consider. Hence the cooperation termination is trivial.

Tool configuration

T2Cert